cites: 174059688

Indraj Singh(D) By Lrs.& Ors vs State Of Haryana & Anr on 19 August, 2013

ment of this Court reported as Maya Devi (Dead) Thr. Lrs v. State of Haryana and Anr.3 that 33% deduction could be made for large lands being acquired when the exemplar is for a smaller area. Thus, with Exhibit 31 having the sale price of Rs.232/- per square feet and 33% deduction is made, the rate would come out to be Rs.160 per square feet. Therefore, the amount claimed by the land owners i.e. at the rate of Rs.150/- per square feet should have been awarded.

Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 36 - Full Document

Balwan Singh And Ors. vs Land Acquisition Collector And Ors. on 8 August, 2007

Land Acquisition Officer5, Tahera Khotoon & Ors. v. Revenue Divisional Officer/Land Acquisition Officer & Ors 6., Balwan Singh & Ors. v. Land Acquisition Collector & Anr.7. It is thus argued that the order of the High Court to remit the matter to the Collector for determination of the compensation from the date of possession till the date of notification is clearly erroneous and the land owners would remain further deprived of the value of the ac- quisition of land.

Delhi High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 16 - S L Bhayana - Full Document

Chimanlal Hargovinddas vs Special Land Acquisition Officer, ... on 21 July, 1988

12. The question of deductions on account of an exemplar of a smaller plot as compared to a larger area under acquisition has come up for consideration before this Court in Chimanlal Hargovinddas v. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Poona and Anr.8. This Court held as under:

Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 832 - M P Thakkar - Full Document

Lal Chand vs Union Of India & Anr on 12 August, 2009

In the judgment reported as Lal Chand v. Union of India and Anr.9, this Court held that deduction for development is to be made to arrive at the market value of large tracts of undeveloped agricultural land (with potential for development) the deduction varies from 20% to 75% of the price of such developed plots. This Court held as under:

Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 524 - R V Raveendran - Full Document

Kasturi & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 12 November, 2002

15. This Court in the judgment reported as Kasturi and Ors. v. State of Haryana10, held that there may be various factual factors which may have to be taken into consideration while applying the cut in payment of compensation towards developmental charges, maybe in some cases it is more than 1/3rd and in some cases less than 1/3rd. This Court held as under:

Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 293 - S V Patil - Full Document

Article 142 in Constitution of India [Constitution]

Constitution Article Cites 3 - Cited by 14698

Search Results Page

Refine Search